Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences or CUREs promote student-centered learning through infusion of research principles within an undergraduate course. This is an ideal pedagogy for use in General Chemistry. CUREs provide access to research experience to a broader audience, which increases engagement and success. A CURE model was implemented in a second semester General Chemistry course at Pasadena City College, a Hispanic serving institution (HSI) community college. Student success rate in the CURE chemistry classroom increased by over 20% and students’ completion rates increased over 5%. In addition, success, and completion rates of Hispanic students in the class showed no achievement gap and an over 10% higher completion rate compared to students that took the non-CURE chemistry course. CUREs also had the added benefit of providing more populous groups of undergraduates with opportunities to get a taste of real-world working scenarios that would normally be reserved for upper-level graduate students. Adopting CUREs as an integral part of an institutions’ learning strategies promotes student engagement that will bridge the gaps in traditional learning, but also facilitate development of the essential soft skills required in the collaborative environment that is commonplace in working professional settings. The potential role and relationship of CUREs implementation regarding the revival and cultivation of polymathy among future students as well as its implications on the future of academic instruction based on connections made from historical and interdisciplinary observations are also explores.
more »
« less
Incorporating Course-based Undergraduate Research Experience into Introductory Chemistry Course; Gender Inequities in STEM Education
Approaches to student-centered active learning have evolved. The progression in course-design has led to the development of new learning paradigms such as collaborative, problem based, and project-based learning. Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) are a learning pedagogy that infuses research experiences within the curriculum. This method of instruction increases opportunities for students to participate in more authentic education experiences and is especially beneficial in the science education pathway. CUREs encourage students to be autonomous and emphasize teamwork. Our research proposes methodologies that can maximize student performance, particularly benefiting underrepresented and underprepared female students. Pre- and post- assessments of a CURE classroom were administered to gauge student engagement and success in a General Chemistry course. Specifically, our research focuses on female
engagement in CURE projects and overall success and retention rates to test if the teaching methods will support increased gender equity in STEM.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2000281
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10421124
- Editor(s):
- Dr. Alice Suroviec
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Journal of laboratory chemical education
- Volume:
- 10
- Issue:
- 2
- ISSN:
- 2331-7450
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 38-44
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
null (Ed.)Here we present unique perspectives from undergraduate students (n=3) in STEM who have taken both a traditional laboratory iteration and a Course-based Undergraduate Research Experience (CURE) iteration of the same introductory chemistry course. CUREs can be effective models for integrating research in courses and fostering student learning gains. Via phenomenological interviews, we asked students to describe the differences in their perspectives, feelings, and experiences between a traditional lab guided by a lab manual and a CURE. We found that (i.) critical thinking/problem solving, (ii.) group work/collaboration, (iii.) student-led research questions and activities, and (iv.) time management are the top four emergent themes associated with the CURE course. Students also indicated that they learned more disciplinary content in the CURE, and, importantly, that they prefer it over the traditional lab. These findings add another dimension of success to CUREs in STEM education, particularly surrounding student retention.more » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract The drive to broaden equitable access to undergraduate research experiences has catalyzed the development and implementation of course‐based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs). Biology education has prioritized embedding CUREs in introductory labs, which are frequently taught by graduate teaching assistants (GTAs). Thus, a CURE GTA is expected not only to teach but also to support novice student researchers. We know little about how GTAs perform as research mentors in a CURE, or how the quality of their mentorship and support impacts undergraduate students. To address this gap in knowledge, we conducted a phenomenological study of an introductory biology CURE, interviewing 25 undergraduate students taught by nine different GTAs at a single institution. We used self‐determination theory to guide our exploration of how students' autonomous motivation to engage in a CURE is impacted by perceptions of GTA support. We found that highly motivated students were more likely to experience factors hypothesized to optimize motivation in the CURE, and to perceive that their GTA was highly supportive of these elements. Students with lower motivation were less likely to report engaging in fundamental elements of research offered in a CURE. Our findings suggest that GTAs directly impact students' motivation, which can, in turn, influence whether students perceive receiving the full research experience as intended in a CURE. We contend that practitioners who coordinate CUREs led by GTAs should therefore offer curated training that emphasizes supporting students' autonomous motivation in the course and engagement in the research. Our work suggests that GTAs may differ in their capacity to provide students with the support they need to receive and benefit from certain pedagogical practices. Future work assessing innovative approaches in undergraduate biology laboratory courses should continue to investigate potenital differential outcomes for students taught by GTAs.
-
more » « less
Abstract Course‐based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) can provide undergraduate students access to research opportunities when student and faculty resources are limited. In addition to expanding research opportunities, CUREs may also be explored as a pedagogical tool for improving student learning of course content and laboratory skills, as well as improving meta‐cognitive features such as confidence. We examined how a 6‐week CURE in an upper‐level undergraduate biochemistry lab affected student gains in content knowledge and confidence in scientific abilities, compared to a non‐CURE section of the same course. We find that gains in content knowledge were similar between CURE and non‐CURE sections, indicating the CURE does not negatively impact student learning. The CURE was associated with a statistically significant gain in student confidence, compared to non‐CURE group. These results show that even a relatively short CURE can be effective in improving student confidence at scientific research skills, in addition to expanding access to research.
-
Rumain, Barbara T. (Ed.)Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) are laboratory courses that integrate broadly relevant problems, discovery, use of the scientific process, collaboration, and iteration to provide more students with research experiences than is possible in individually mentored faculty laboratories. Members of the national Malate dehydrogenase CUREs Community (MCC) investigated the differences in student impacts between traditional laboratory courses (control), a short module CURE within traditional laboratory courses (mCURE), and CUREs lasting the entire course (cCURE). The sample included approximately 1,500 students taught by 22 faculty at 19 institutions. We investigated course structures for elements of a CURE and student outcomes including student knowledge, student learning, student attitudes, interest in future research, overall experience, future GPA, and retention in STEM. We also disaggregated the data to investigate whether underrepresented minority (URM) outcomes were different from White and Asian students. We found that the less time students spent in the CURE the less the course was reported to contain experiences indicative of a CURE. The cCURE imparted the largest impacts for experimental design, career interests, and plans to conduct future research, while the remaining outcomes were similar between the three conditions. The mCURE student outcomes were similar to control courses for most outcomes measured in this study. However, for experimental design, the mCURE was not significantly different than either the control or cCURE. Comparing URM and White/Asian student outcomes indicated no difference for condition, except for interest in future research. Notably, the URM students in the mCURE condition had significantly higher interest in conducting research in the future than White/Asian students.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- The DOI is not currently available.
